Digital Strengths Required Even in a "Wave" Year

Republicans are worrying, and Democrats rejoicing, over signs that 2018 may be a "wave election" year that sweeps Democrats to control of the House and maybe even Senate. Before Democratic hopefuls get cocky or Republicans throw in the towel, both should note a recent Campaigns & Elections article about lessons learned in Democrat Doug Jones' historic win in deep-red Alabama. C&E makes the point that, wave or no wave, a winning campaign has "got to leave it all on the field, regardless of what the forecast is ... To wit, Jones won by just over 20,000 votes—and few predicted he’d defeat Roy Moore." C&E cites six digital marketing lessons from Jones' victory. Start with realizing the importance of authenticity in both the message and how it is conveyed, especially in online ads and video where an authenticity will matter more than slick production. Note that digital success requires more than standard online ads; Jones' campaign invested heavily in social and engagement platforms, bought standalone video and audio inventory, used display and rich media, and maxed out what was possible on search. Third, C&R warns, a percentage-based budget that starts with heavy TV spending and divides small remaining percentages among other channels will risk missing that vaunted wave; C&E advises using an audience-first approach instead, maximizing reach and frequency for all marketing channels taken together and based on how various voting groups get their news and information. Fourth, campaigns need to focus on engagement as well as reach to get people to remember an ad in an extremely crowded media environment. That means investing in social media platforms and going beyond traditional display ads by using HTML5 and rich media to embed interactive content and voting resources in standard banners. Then get those engaging ads to more voters by using digital to expand voter reach, especially given the falling impact of traditional media channels (40% of voters watch no TV, C&E notes). But don't try to stretch a digital budget too thin at the outset striving for maximum audience; pick off priority audiences and build the program from there, C&E advises. See the whole article at https://www.campaignsandelections.com/campaign-insider/6-lessons-to-remember-during-a-wave-year

Who Do Voters Trust? Media, Politicians or None

President Donald Trump and his political and media supporters have been preaching against the "fake news." What impact has that had on voters? How much do voters trust the media vs. politicians? One year after Trump's victory, the Elections Research Center at the University of Wisconsin-Madison commissioned a national survey to find out whom Trump supporters trust and how that confidence is related to whom the American people want to make political decisions. While support from Republicans clearly remains key to Trump’s chances for success, the survey reveals that party is less important than Trump's cult of personality. A representative sample of 2,000 Americans was asked, “When the news media and politicians disagree about the facts of a situation, which one are you more likely to trust?” and 70% of the public still chose the media. However, among those Americans who approved of President Trump’s job performance (about 38% of the sample), 80% said they trusted politicians over the news media. These were largely, but not exclusively, white men. Yet these same Trump supporters do not trust politicians in general with making important decisions about how our democracy works. Survey respondents were asked who they thought should be making our political decisions—ordinary people, politicians, or an equal mix of the two—and 69% preferred an equal mix. More surprisingly, only 6% of those who said they trusted politicians over the media (overwhelmingly Trump supporters) also said they wanted those same politicians making decisions about running the country. This suggests that Trump’s support is less about partisan loyalty or adherence to a philosophy of democratic governance than it is about confidence in Trump himself—and even that support has been dwindling to historic lows. It also suggests that Republican politicians hoping to ride Trump's coattails in the 2018 midterm elections may be in for a bumpy ride as they court his "base." For more, see https://www.vox.com/mischiefs-of-faction/2017/11/21/16684474/trump-voters-media-trust

Study Details Direct Mail Impact on Voters

Political candidates and causes in 2018 election campaigns will want to give direct mail a key role based on a recent joint study from the USPS and the American Association of Political Consultants: "Voters and Mail: Five Insights to Boost Campaign Impact." The study found, for example, that mail is especially effective in moving voters to action, with 66 % of Millennials (voters aged 18-34) and 52% of non-Millennials saying that political direct mail motivated them to search for additional information about a candidate. More significantly, 57% of Millennials and 54% of non-Millennials said that political direct mail helped them make a decision on how to vote. With an increasing number of voters choosing early and absentee voting, direct mail can help campaigns win votes before the polls open because voters rely on mail to remind them of deadlines. In fact, 81% of U.S. adults say they prefer direct mail when they don’t know about an absentee ballot deadline, and 69% wanted direct mail when they didn’t know about a voter registration deadline. However, with so many information sources competing for voter attention--from TV to social media to traditional mail--the most successful direct mail will cater to voter content preferences. Per the study, 82% of registered voters want campaign mail to address a candidate’s position on the issues, 74% indicated that they were interested in campaign mail that contrasts the candidate with their opponent on the issues, and 73% were interested in campaign mail that illustrated the candidate’s voting record on past issues. While voters are inundated with communications in national elections, it's important to remember for next year's midterms that direct mail has special impact in state and local races, especially for younger voters. For example, a study released by the Postal Service found that Millennials found direct mail to be key in helping make a decision about races at the state level (82%) and local level (80%). For more political mail insights, see the USPS/AAPC research at https://www.deliverthewin.com/voters-and-mail-5-insights-to-boost-your-campaign/

Research: Deepening Internal GOP & Dem Divides

The Pew Research Center's latest study is confirming what the headlines are saying: Both Democrats and Republicans face deep internal party divisions. As causes and candidates ready for the 2018 election cycle, successful targeting and messaging may need to be more complex to build winning voter coalitions. Per Pew's "typology," the Core Conservatives still represent the largest faction (31%) among Republicans, although they represent only 15% of registered voters. They are the traditional male, well-off, fiscal conservatives supporting lower taxes, trade and global U.S. leadership--and the candidates that Steven Bannon's "Trumpism" is targeting. The older, less educated Country First Conservatives, who are wary of immigration and global involvement, make up just 7% of registered voters. Can they find an uneasy alliance against the "establishment" with the Market Skeptic Republicans, representing another 12% of registered voters? Most of the Market Skeptics are suspicious of financial institutions and government (and even back raising corporate taxes). Finally, the younger and more ethnically diverse New Era Enterprisers, a la Florida's Sen. Marco Rubio, are both pro-business and positive about immigration, and they hold 11% of voters. These warring GOP factions are divided by issues such as immigration, global involvement and homosexuality, while the Democrats are more likely to argue the best policy to effect agreed-upon ideology. The Democrats, a party of increasing racial, ethnic and financial diversity, are led by the 48% identified as Solid Liberals, who take traditional liberal positions on almost all issues. The Solid Liberals also represent the largest batch of registered voters nationally at 19%. While the less educated Opportunity Democrats agree with the Liberals on major issues, they are more pro-business and make up another 13% of voters. Disaffected Democrats represent another 14% of voters and, despite their moniker, are actually positive about the party, just cynical about government and the "system." Finally, 9% of voters are classified as Devote and Diverse Democrats, who are less affluent and more socially conservative. For details, including survey views on President Trump, see http://www.people-press.org/2017/10/24/political-typology-reveals-deep-fissures-on-the-right-and-left/

6-Second Ad Trend Challenges Political Campaigns

Political campaigns are facing a new challenge in the fast-paced digital ad race. Political marketers, who have honed standard 30-second video ads for TV and online, must now adapt to a trend to 6-second ad spots, reports a recent article in Campaigns & Elections magazine. With public attention spans shortening, corporate marketers are declaring that 6 seconds is a more effective format, especially for reaching "a younger demographic." The article notes that Google’s YouTube has been holding a contest to promote the format, that Facebook CEO Sheryl Sandberg recently told investors that the length was ideal for sales pitches, and that Fox TV debuted its first ever 6-second ad slots during the "Teen Choice Awards" in August. Although both Democrats and Republicans want to court the "younger demographic" in 2018, political media consultants express misgivings on their ability to leverage the trend, citing concerns about condensing a message into a 6- or 10-second "snackable" ad creative that will still persuade. They worry that even today's micro-targeting of voters will not overcome a poorly executed appeal. "We found the perfect voter," Casey Phillips, a media consultant with a GOP client roster explains for the magazine, "we can buy [what he is watching], but what is it that we’re going to tell him in 10 seconds, and get it done in a way that doesn’t suck. That’s where we're all having problems." Budget limitations pose another hurdle for political marketers.  Political consultants see the costs to produce and edit down 30-second spots into shorter versions, as well as spread those ads across the many available digital and traditional media formats, as putting added strain on campaign budgets in the next election cycle. For more on the trend to "snackable" ads, read https://www.campaignsandelections.com/campaign-insider/snackable-ads-giving-some-media-consultants-heartburn

'Memes' the Word for Today's Political Donors

Donors to political campaigns and causes are being drawn to a new strategy for political influence: viral digital. In addition to funding TV ads and PACs, The New York Times reports that deep-pocket donors are now bankrolling partisan organizations that specialize in creating catchy, shareable memes, messages and videos, especially on social media platforms. Outfits ranging from Occupy Democrats to the alt-right Milo Inc. are gathering donors who hope that their streams of aggregated links, captioned images and short videos will garner funds, votes and real-world action. While operatives across the political spectrum are being attracted now, the bandwagon got rolling with the Trump campaign's success with Twitter and other social platforms, to the point where a study found that nearly two-thirds of the most popular election tweets were either anti-Clinton or pro-Trump. The Times story cites many new participants from the left/progressive side of the aisle today, including David Brock, a well-known Democratic operative, who started an effort last year to raise $40 million to support Shareblue, a left-wing viral news outfit to rival alt-right publisher Breitbart. And there's John Sellers, a left-wing organizer and former Greenpeace activist, who started a Facebook page called The Other 98% to promote environmentalism and other progressive causes, which now boasts 5 million followers and funding of its nonprofit affiliate by donors such as billionaire George Soros-backed Open Society Foundations. The low cost for potentially high impact is especially attractive to causes and donors. Per the Times, Stand Up America, a progressive group run by Sean Eldridge, husband of Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes, reaches, on average, 10 million people weekly by only spending "in the low six figures" to produce a Facebook page of shareable graphics and news. For more detail, read the full story at https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/06/business/media/political-donors-put-their-money-where-the-memes-are.html

Game-Changer? Programmatic Ads, Survey Wed

A union of consumer survey data with programmatic advertising could help political campaigns pre-screen audiences for better ad targeting in the 2018 midterm elections. Two digital companies, Lotame, a data management platform for advertisers, and Survata, a market research/survey firm, have announced a partnership to create what they are calling a "segment validation product," per a recent Adweek story. Lotame will supply more than 8 billion data points to Survata, which will ping back against those points and survey an actual audience. A client of the partnership product can then independently target the right participants with ads. Andy Monfried, founder and CEO at Lotame, explained to Adweek that the new partnership will enable clients "to automatically verify third-party data validity as part of their data strategy" and "deliver on the promise of 'real-time' actionable insights through the use of enhanced data." Cleveland-based ad agency Marcus Thomas is already in line to test the system, according to the report. But it's easy to see the potential appeal to political marketers--for example to improve targeted response for fundraising-based digital advertising. Chris Kelly, Survata CEO, acknowledged to Adweek that, while brands will likely always be the primary focus, "this could indeed be used for political audiences, too." So expect to see some 2018 political candidates and causes drawn to a promise that their programmatic media buys can be launched with "full confidence the audiences they are targeting contain the right people," as Kelly says. For the complete story: http://www.adweek.com/digital/an-ad-tech-firm-and-a-survey-player-want-to-improve-programmatic-buying-by-pre-screening-audiences/

Political Ads Wither in Trump Presidency's Chaos

If your political or advocacy ad campaign is confused about what, when and where to promote, you're not alone. Even though politics is leading the news cycle, driving traffic online and in broadcast media, the chaos of the Trump presidency is leaving many political advertisers in limbo, according to a recent AdExchanger article by James Hercher. Jordan Lieberman, politics and public affairs lead at the ad targeting firm Audience Partners, explained to Hercher that “the legislative calendar is so messed up, it’s not leaving time for organizations or activists to really plan a campaign.” Typically, the year following a presidential campaign sees many high-profile bills and public opinion ad campaigns. This year, without any bills or coherent legislative direction, special interests and advocacy groups are hesitant. “There’s this element of the unexpected now,” noted Grace Briscoe, vice president of candidates and causes at ad tech company Centro. “Clients that previously planned out three to six months ahead around Congressional recesses and the legislative calendar are doing maybe week-long tactical campaigns.” Four political digital ad buyers told Hercher that soft demand has decreased rates for media packages offered by publishers as diverse as the Daily Caller, Roll Call, McClatchy, RealClearPolitics and Daily Kos, and that even national news publishers with broader audiences are feeling the ad demand pinch. In fact, brand and advocacy advertisers apparently find high-profile political coverage today so anathema, regardless of partisan viewpoint, that they are dodging it altogether, with Briscoe reporting a marked drop in brand and advocacy clients interested in appearing next to political stories. See https://adexchanger.com/politics/political-media-struggles-capitalize-trump-bump/

Why Direct Mail Is Still Top Political Campaign Tool

At Beyond Voter Lists, we specialize in supporting political direct marketing, especially when it come to targeted data for postal efforts. So we're happy to read that one takeaway from this year's major political marketing conferences is the continued value of direct mail. In Campaigns & Elections magazine, Elena Neely, national lead for the U.S. Postal Service® (USPS) Political Mail Outreach efforts, describes five reasons she supports that conclusion. Let's start with an obvious one: Mail is still the only campaign channel with 100% voter reach since you have to have a mailing address to register to vote. Next, direct mail is a highly targetable medium, and political campaign success today relies more on targeting specific audiences than mass marketing. The proof is in Borrell Associates’ 2016 political advertising analysis report that more targetable media, including digital, cable and direct mail, “gained $1.7 billion over 2012 spending levels while radio, TV and newspapers lost nearly $1.3 billion.” Next, direct mail retains a place in the campaign promotional mix because there just is no one-size-fits-all medium for audience targeting; as the Pew Research Center found, people are influenced by multiple information sources, with nearly half of 2016 respondents learning about the presidential race from five or more types of sources, ranging from cable television to social media to campaign e-mails. Direct mail also fits easily into a multichannel effort; for example, campaigns can use a mailer's QR code to digitally connect voters to a social media platform or campaign website. Yes, different generations and demographics respond to direct mail differently, but it works well across the board. A 2016 USPS survey not only found that 46% of baby boomers ranked mail as their preferred political ad format but younger millennials also rated political mail “important” for state elections (82%), local elections (80%) and even national races (76%). And when it comes to vital swing voters, 58% said mail was “very or somewhat helpful,” and that compares with television (55%), digital ads (48%) and e-mail (46%). Finally, as attention spans shorten and media noise escalates, direct mail can use tangible creativity to grab share of mind, with dimensional mail, audio mail and video mail as examples. For the complete article, go to https://www.campaignsandelections.com/campaign-insider/5-things-every-campaign-should-know-about-direct-mail-last-cycle

Political Campaigns Face Social Media Changes

Social media strategy is essential for the success of political campaigns and causes today. As the Pew Research Center reports, a majority of Americans now say they get news via social media, and half of the public turned to social media sites to learn about the 2016 presidential election. Social success in 2016 doesn't mean campaigns can rest on their laurels, however. A Digital Information World post by Anthony Bergs--including a handy infographic from CJG Marketing--cites a list of social media changes and trends that political marketers should include in 2017 strategies. For example, improved social targeting got a lot of buzz in 2016, with campaigns embracing the effectiveness of Facebook's “Lookalike” audiences. But in 2017, machine learning, artificial intelligence and access to increasing amounts of data--from demographics and behavior all the way to forecasting of intent-- will support even more precise ad targeting, provided campaigns make the investment in audience data and analytics. The response-getting power of digital video is well-proven, so it's no shock that 48% of marketers are planning to add YouTube videos in 2017.  Campaigns and causes would be wise to also invest in an internal or external video content development team and live streaming,  now available on social platforms such as Facebook, Twitter's Periscope, YouTube and Snapchat. Next to video at the top of social marketing agendas this year is "influencer marketing," with 84% of marketers planning at least one social media influencer campaign to find and leverage sources of followers and engagement. One reason for the influencer search is that the ability to generate free organic traffic via social media is waning thanks to social platform algorithms favoring paid ads and squeezing out organic content. With Facebook and Twitter offering just 2% to 4% organic reach for posts in 2016 (and falling), most political budgets need to include paid social ads. But here's good news: Chatbot technology is on the horizon and promises to handle a mass volume of user conversations one-on-one with customized content; Facebook's current Messenger bot is a harbinger of more to come. For more social media trends, check out the article and infographic at http://www.digitalinformationworld.com/2017/01/infographic-social-media-marketing-trends.html

Social Media Listening Informs New Political Strategy

Digital marketing to a targeted audience with relevant messaging is a must in politics now. But how can a campaign develop the required digital audience understanding to be most effective? One answer is social media listening, per a 2017 business2community.com post by Augustus Franklin, CEO of CallHub, supplier of voice and SMS broadcast software. Franklin cites 11 social media monitoring insights to help turbocharge your digital marketing strategy. Here are just his initial five tips: First, design a social media monitoring blueprint by creating an extensive list of relevant keywords and hashtags on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, etc. Find the people who follow your campaign or cause (or brand), have tweeted about it, or have "liked" relevant posts. Second, expand on the existing network of people who have shown interest in a keyword or hashtag and ask them to tweet with a certain hashtag, or share a post with their network, to garner the followers of your followers. Try to capitalize on advocates with influence in online communities outside the social networks, such as blogs or forums. Third, turn general demand into specific engagement by identifying social activity that aligns with your candidate or cause and reach out to these prospects with messages configured to their expressed interests/needs. Keep track of those who subsequently like, share, post, etc., because that engagement is a step closer to conversion (to a volunteer, donor or voter). Fourth, merge your social media inflow data with your marketing outreach list, and directly contact the socially engaged to ask them to spread your message. And fifth, use social listening to learn what each target audience segment wants to hear, from their perspectives, so you can specifically address challenges and needs in messaging. To get even more targeting insights, also monitor the activity on social networks of opponents and allies to see what people are saying. These insights can help to map engagement paths from interest to advocacy and to craft testing for analysis of what marketing works best. For all 11 tips, go to http://www.business2community.com/digital-marketing/11-lessons-political-listening-supercharge-digital-strategy

The Trump Marketing Effect: Temporary or Lasting?

Entering 2017, political marketing has some new ground rules thanks to Donald Trump's unorthodox campaign and presidential style, per political pundits. For example, while political campaigns used to focus on motivating voters to get involved, voter passion (from protest marches to besieged political offices) seems to be the rule rather than the exception now. Where political campaigners once tried to fight voter apathy, today they need to understand and address voter demands. A recent Direct Marketing News article cites Will Bunnett, Clarify Agency principal and former senior e-mail writer and producer in 2008 at Obama for America: "The voters that are the subjects of political marketing are behaving much differently in this political climate than they have in the past. Right now, political marketing is less about cajoling people to get them motivated, and more about keeping up with the demands from voters." How did Trump succeed? With a branding strategy, opines Bunnett. "The [Trump] brand handled the persuasion and the turnout, so branding strategy will get more attention in the future of political marketing thanks to Trump's success with it," he tells DM News and adds, "I predict that in the wake of Trump, political marketers will refocus on strategy over tactics" such as moving voters up an engagement ladder from interest to petition to donation. But a big question is whether this is a permanent or temporary shift in the political winds. Bunnett, for one, warns political strategists to "avoid overcompensating for a shift in voter behavior that's ultimately probably temporary." He urges campaigns and causes to "adapt to the passion right now," but "not forget how to cajole." For the full article, see http://www.dmnews.com/marketing-strategy/how-trump-changed-political-marketing/article/637000/

Study: Negativity Ruled 2016 Political Coverage

A Harvard University study released in December concluded that media coverage of the 2016 presidential election was overwhelmingly negative, topped only by the 2000 Bush-Gore campaign, according to an Associated Press (AP) news story in U.S. News. Once "horse race" stories about polls were eliminated, coverage of issues relating to Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton's fitness for office were identically 87% negative for each candidate, according to the report from Harvard's Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy. The researchers looked at coverage on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and Fox News Channel nightly newscasts, along with The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, USA Today, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal newspapers. The media analysis firm Media Tenor judged the tone of stories; for example, a story about the FBI reopening an investigation into Clinton's e-mails was judged a negative for her, while a story about lawsuits against Trump's business was a seen as negative for him. With all stories included, 71% of the overall presidential race coverage was negative, and 29% was positive. By comparison the 2000 presidential race had a negative-to-positive ratio of 75% to 25%. That's very different from earlier, more positive campaign coverage trends; in the Kennedy-Nixon campaign in 1960, for example, three-quarters of the coverage was judged positive, according to the Harvard report. Overall, whether positive or negative, Trump received far more media attention than any rival. Yet, while the negative tone may have generated interest as measured by television ratings, it didn't seem to drive voter turnout since unusually large numbers of voters either abstained from the presidential election or entered write-in candidates per early evaluations by the U.S. Elections Project, which collects data on national voter turnout. But perhaps the biggest issue for mainstream news organizations was the trend of voters snubbing mainstream relevancy in favor of news sources that bolstered their own viewpoints — including fake news sites. David Bohrman, a former CNN Washington bureau chief who helped with NBC's political coverage, summed up to AP: "The traditional gatekeepers were out there saying 'this is true and this is not.' But they were lost in the noise of 4,200 other sources of information." For the full story, see http://www.usnews.com/news/entertainment/articles/2016-12-07/study-2016-campaign-coverage-was-overwhelmingly-negative

Google Offers New Election Search Trends Hub

Whether campaigning at the national, state or county level in today's digital-first environment, political pros want to track what engaged voters care about in real time, and what better gauge than Internet activity? Enter the newly launched Google Trends Election Hub, a trove of free research. Search Engine Land recently reported on how the new Google hub site takes a deep dive into this year’s election-related search trends across the United States, with real-time reports on president and vice president candidate search queries, by state, plus search data on state and county political issues. And if you wonder how engaged the electorate is online, Google reports this year’s election-related searches are up 240% over the same period preceding 2012’s Election Day. Just some of the goodies you can cull: The hub home page has a chart graphing national search interest in each candidate over the previous week, as well as links to daily state-by-state search interests, voter registration searches, and the top election issue-related searches by state during the past week. There are also charts graphing the number of “Vote for [presidential candidate]” searches during the past week, and tracking of searches for “how to vote,” which Google reports is at its highest rate ever. At the state level, candidates and causes can drill down to the county level on issue interests; for example, while the economy is the most searched issue on average across the swing state of Florida, immigration is more searched in southern counties in that state. There's even a YouTube election map so you can see how many people are watching Trump vs. Clinton videos. Check it out at https://www.google.com/trends/story/election2016

Targeted Digital, TV Ads Mark Political Milestones

In 2016, major political campaigns that don't embrace targeted, programmatic digital and media advertising are simply on the wrong side of history, implies a recent Adweek article. The article presents an evolution of political advertising compiled by Videology, a digital video ad platform that works with political campaigns on both sides of the aisle. There's a handy infographic that starts back before the Founding Fathers promoted revolution and shows how technology is speeding up and raising the stakes. You can see that the first meetings of Massachusetts town halls in 1633 have been replaced by Facebook town halls with national reach. James Polk unveiled a durable political tool, the first campaign slogan, back in 1844, but 2016 campaigns that want to leverage a rallying cry turn it into a hash tag for millions of Twitter followers. And since presidential contenders George W. Bush and John Kerry invited voters to their dueling websites in 2004 nomination speeches, and President Barack Obama inaugurated a social media strategy to woo younger voters in 2008, political digital advertising has exploded. In fact, spending on political digital advertising is expected to top $1 billion for the first time in 2016. More than half the digital ad budget will be used to target social media sites this year, the infographic reveals. In 1952, Dwight Eisenhower launched the first TV political ads, and now, per Borrell Associates, the bulk of the projected $11.7 billion spent for political ads in the 2016 election cycle will go to local broadcast television at $5.9 billion. That's a spending record, but the increased use of TV ad targeting technology is what Videology spots as the significant shift; Hillary Clinton's campaign especially now uses addressable TV advertising to target TV ads to specific households based on demographics and set-top boxes. Adweek quotes Videology's Mark McKee, SVP of North America: "This idea of more addressable ways of which to connect consumers is something that, hands down, everyone is talking to us about. It's not about these mass market pushes that they're thinking about and strategizing most of their time. It's much more about 'Where are the places that we need to make the biggest difference with a very targeted message?'" For the article and infographic, go to http://www.adweek.com/news/technology/infographic-town-halls-targeting-political-advertising-has-come-long-way-172283

How Presidential Hopefuls Score on Social Media

Social media has been making political news in 2016, from Donald Trump's controversial tweets to Bernie Sanders' millennial "like"-ability. So how do all the presidential hopefuls compare in terms of their social media ground game? In a recent Fortune magazine article, the analytics team of Hootsuite social media management rated the candidates on five key categories of social performance: impact, engagement, reach. sentiment, and authenticity. It should be no surprise that GOP front-runner Donald Trump comes out on top, using social media as part of a three-pronged strategy of interdependent, mutually reinforcing use of rallies, media coverage and social buzz. On the theory that any type of attention is better than no attention, Trump wins with impact, reach and authenticity, even though he is weaker than other candidates on engagement and sentiment (more negative social mentions). Close on Trump's heels is Democrat challenger Bernie Sanders, who succeeds with strong engagement, impact and authenticity, despite lack of a planned strategy. Bernie's young followers have created a collective social energy for him that his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton can envy. Nevertheless, Democratic leader Clinton comes in third overall thanks to her huge reach (second only to Trump); she has 3.1 million Twitter followers, 3.1 million Facebook likes, successful use of Instagram and early embrace of Snapchat. She also scores higher on positive sentiment. Meanwhile, Republican Ted Cruz trails in fourth place with weak reach and tepid sentiment inspiration; Cruz counts just 3.2 million followers on Twitter and Facebook compared with Trump’s 14.5 million, for example. And John Kasich is dead last, in delegates and social power, with just 292,000 followers on Twitter and 286,000 likes on Facebook. For the detailed analysis, read http://fortune.com/2016/04/18/bernie-sanders-donald-trump-social-media/

Political Digital: Why Google, Facebook, Twitter Rule

Political campaigns are forecast to spend over $1 billion on digital advertising this election cycle, and they have more online, social and mobile options than ever before. But so far, just three platforms are set to claim most of the political digital ad spend--Google, Facebook and Twitter--reports AdExchanger, a digital marketing trade publication. Political campaigns tend to end up with Google or Facebook even if they buy via a political ad network or independent media/technology seller, the report notes. One reason is that political ad buying involves long-term planning and reserved buys of short duration, which is very different from the iterative testing and optimization that independent agencies are used to handling for brand advertisers. The leading digital platforms also have benefited this election from the disruptive impact of "earned media," the free coverage that GOP presidential hopeful Donald Trump used in trouncing the Rubio and Bush campaigns despite their big paid-media spends. Paid-media effectiveness doubts have sent political operatives looking for safe bets--and that benefits proven digital media incumbents. The Digital Big 3 have further honed their edge by aggressively hiring political insiders with Democratic or Republican connections in building their account teams. The AdExchanger article cites recent VP of policy hires such as a GOP congresswoman for Google, a George W. Bush aide for Facebook, and a senior Democratic aide for Twitter. Plus, Facebook and Google have developed new tools specifically tailored to politicos. Facebook offers targeting of "political influencers" who actively consume and share political news on the platform, and, new for 2016, voter file matching. Meanwhile, Google has introduced a beta tool just for presidential candidates, Posts, which gives them some control over which content is displayed in a search of their name. For more, read http://adexchanger.com/politics/three-big-web-companies-are-dominating-political-ad-budgets/

Programmatic Ads Need Emotional Power to Win

Programmatic advertising--using data and automation to reach the right audiences in real time--is a key innovation of this political cycle. But anyone who thinks robotic ad technology allows robotic creative is going to lose, warns a recent Adweek magazine post by C. Sean McCullough, regional director of sales at AOL Advertising. Political campaigns and causes caught of up in mastering the technology would do well to make sure they are not neglecting the message. The voter is still the ultimate target of the technology, and "voters, much more so than consumers, are motivated to action by having formed emotional connections," McCullough argues. Programmatic ad campaigns use precise targeting analytics, intelligent algorithms, frequency modeling, creative customizing, feedback and retargeting to cut inefficiencies and costs while avoiding target saturation and ad fatigue across a range of devices, including mobile. But the creative launched must still connect the viewer with the candidate and elicit an emotional response to motivate action. Campaigns wondering how to infuse emotional connection via music, images and words can turn to political science studies that have shown fear is a powerful negative persuader, especially for change, while feel-good "enthusiasm" is a positive mobilizer, especially to reinforce existing beliefs. For an overview of research on the use of emotional motivators in political ads, check out http://journalistsresource.org/studies/politics/ads-public-opinion/negative-political-ads-effects-voters-research-roundup. For McCullough's passionate post, read: http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/when-it-comes-political-programmatic-advertising-creative-has-be-emotionally-charged-170559

Digital, Radio Push Up Political Ad Spend Prediction

The 2016 election is going to be even more expensive than expected for campaigns and causes, according to the latest update by ad spending monitor Borrell Associates. Borrell boosted its political ad spending estimates by 3.1% in March, raising spending for the year by $357 million, to a projected total of $11.7 billion before Americans go to the polls on November 8. Surprisingly, the upward revision in expected ad spending is not coming from the presidential race, where spending projections were actually lowered by 1.7% thanks to GOP candidate Donald Trump's unprecedented use of "earned media." The report notes that for every dollar the Trump campaign has spent, it has received $189.80 in free media coverage, way above Hillary Clinton's $26.60 in free coverage for every dollar spent. The presidential race still leads ad spending, but state assemblies, local offices and local ballot issues are a close second, expected to contribute just over $1.7 billion each. The media distribution of ad budget growth is shifting, however. With broadcast TV inventory clogged by campaigns and PACs, half of the increased political ad spending will go to digital and radio, and local media in general, per the report. Meanwhile, direct mail and telemarketing spending are also seen grow as part of the "ground game" to recruit new voters. Based on current trends, Borrell foresees a very different political ad landscape by 2020, with a decline in broadcast TV spending and growth in digital outreach. To download the "2016 U.S. Political Ad Spending Update" with state-by-state estimates and breakouts of spending by races for President, Senate, House, Governor, Attorney General, State Assemblies, county/local elections and ballot issues, go to https://www.borrellassociates.com/industry-papers/papers/2016-u-s-political-ad-spending-update-march-16-detail

2016 Electorate Most Diverse in History

The electorate in 2016 will be the most racially and ethnically diverse in U.S. history, according to the most recent report from the Pew Research Center. Nearly one in three eligible voters (31%) will be Hispanic, African-American, Asian or another racial or ethnic minority, up from 29% when President Obama last won the White House in 2012. And the demographic shifts are expected to continue. While the 156 million eligible non-Hispanic white voters still outnumber the 70 million eligible minority voters, the non-Hispanic white voter growth is slower and will continue to lose electorate share. Already the group dropped from 71% of the electorate in 2012 to 69% in 2016. In fact two-thirds of the net growth in the U.S. electorate has come from racial and ethnic minorities, up 7.5 million eligible voters since 2012, compared to the addition of just 3.2 million non-Hispanic white voters. Non-Hispanic whites are losing ground because of the higher mean age of the group, leading to a higher death rate and a smaller percentage of new young voters who turned 18 since 2012. Immigrants, though a contentious issue in the current presidential race, are not a key growth driver for any group but Asians. Some 60% of new Asian voters came via naturalization, compared with just 26% of new Hispanic voters since 2012. However, turnout rates may reduce the initial impact of these demographic shifts, adds Pew Research. In 2012, 64% of non-Hispanic white and 67% of black eligible voters actually cast ballots, compared with just 48% of Hispanic and 47% of Asians. For more data, see http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/02/03/2016-electorate-will-be-the-most-diverse-in-u-s-history/